Time Magazine article

[NoNo]

My point wasn't just that artificial sweeteners are bad, but that they play into the notion that you're somehow having something healthier because it doesn't have sugar in it. And my friend is a perfect example of what the Time article was talking about. He works out several times a week, and the rest of the week he plays ice hockey. You'd think someone like that would be in decent shape, but he's a large boy Why? His diet, quite frankly, sucks. But he honestly thought he was having something decent because the marketing has taught him that sugar is evil. Well you're still taking in empty calories! Stop trying to get your vitamins from scientifically created "fruit-like beverages", and just have some water and eat an apple. Try eating some vegetables. Just don't think you can eat cookies and snacks and get all the nutritional value you need because things have been fortified with some vitamin or another. Of couse, when I told him that, he told me to "F*** off!" Maybe some people don't want to hear the truth, or they already know it but don't have the guts to make the change. All I know is my IBS has pretty much disppeared since I started eating real foods, and the less pain I'm in the happier I am!

[witeowl]

Of couse, when I told him that, he told me to "F*** off!" Maybe some people don't want to hear the truth, or they already know it but don't have the guts to make the change.

Personal choice does not equal "lack of guts". I know how sugar affects me and choose to ingest artificial sweeteners because I do better without the highs and lows. Other people choose not to exercise. Other people choose to drink or smoke or play video games. Whatever. I can't judge them, can I?

Also, was this unsolicited advice? I know I get pretty irate when on the receiving end of that, no matter how well-meaning the giver.